This thread is for discussion of property rights, self-determination, natural order, right-libertarianism and the PHYSICAL REMOVAL of COMMUNIST FAGS from our board of peace. Reminder that this is the Libertarian RIGHT General. Left-Libertarians, Cosmopolitan freaks, Open borders cucks and other assorted libertine degenerates need to fuck off.
Questions are welcome, however many are repeated often. We advise you research the basics before asking.
THREAD RESOURCES:
>Pastebin: pastebin.com
>Discord & Book Club: Kd2WD2X
RECOMMENDED MATERIAL:
>The Machinery Of Freedom: Illustrated Summary (David Friedman) - youtube.com
>Anatomy of the State (Murray Rothbard)
mises.org
>For a New Liberty (Murray Rothbard)
mises.org
>Democracy: The God that Failed (Hans Hermann-Hoppe) - riosmauricio.com
FURTHER READING:
>Reference - See i.imgur.com
>Torrent - magnet:?xt=urn:btih:8d8ec6ef882dee291f119eb69994797574e5d616&dn=Anarcho-Capitalism%20Books
THREAD TUNES:
>hoppewave | Hans-Hermann Hoppe | physical removal - youtube.com/watch?v=LP41IK91_qA
>Against the State - (Hoppewave Hans Hermann Hoppe) - youtube.com/watch?v=HLaqr3QorCw
>I need a Pinochet! - youtube.com/watch?v=zhrYY3ocQ5o
>Drop it like it's Hoppe - youtube.com/watch?v=HPKGgo4kGQM
>Bump for Life, Liberty, and Private Death Squads
/lrg/ LIBERTARIAN RIGHT GENERAL
Other urls found in this thread:
mises.org
youtube.com
mises.org
mises.org
youtube.com
chelm.freeyellow.com
mises.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Open Borders infecting libertarianism is Soros funded bullshit. don't fall for it brothers.
>Open Borders Are an Assault on Private Property | Lew Rockwell
mises.org
>Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal | Lew Rockwell
youtube.com
>Nations by Consent | Murray Rothbard
mises.org
>Natural Order, the State, and the Immigration Problem | Hans-Hermann Hoppe
mises.org
>Libertarianism is a tool of Zionism, Invented by jews, ect ect.
STOP GLOBALISM.
ABOLISH CENTRAL BANKING.
END THE FED.
GAS THE STATE
NONE of this helps Zionist control. We challenge power more than any National Socialists think they do.
Locke, Smith and Bastiat, the founders of capitalism as an economic system based off private property norms, were all Gentiles. Acquisition of resources is a vital part of human action and has brought us such wonders like ancient architecture, art, and technology far beyond what we could have imagined a hundred years ago. Jews are interested because it deals with acquisition of resources, like any other serious economic system.
>"The Jewish Question" by Life Love and ANARCHY
youtube.com
>Documenting Anti-Semitism Within the Libertarian Movement:
chelm.freeyellow.com
Even our favored jews are blasted for being token jews, anti-semites and racists by jews in high places.
You can point out Rothbard (pbuh) was a jew, but you can find no link to zionism or bolshevism. I dare you to call the libertarian philosophy a tool of zionism. bring your evidence fag.
>muh libertarianism is all about promoting drug use and anal sex.
Again this is cultural marxist bullshit, a narrative given to the (((libertarian party))) pushed by all the zog'd "libertarian" interest groups.
I m some what new to libertarianism, so what is the view in the community on trump ?
Trump is good in the sense that he will slow the elites to further his own personal agenda. But no elected politician will take us to the land of sugar and milk. they are all servants to the state in the end.
Voting will never make america libertarian again.
so what would make america libertarian again?
I highly doubt the whole of America can be saved. the best course of action in my opinion is to break up America, secession through political means if possible, but ultimately through armed struggle.
>armed struggle
against the state ? is this justification not the same argument the lefties (antifa) uses ?
Good to see you actual libtards instead of the antifa faggots for once.
t. Fascfaggot
Yes. it is the same in that we both know the state is abusive. The difference is that they "attack the state" by throwing rocks at windows in attempt to bring an even more abusive socialist goverment into power, and we'd defend ourselves from the state by standing our ground so that we may determine our own destiny and preserve our way of life.
the antifa communists are a far greater threat to our liberty than you. Consider us friends until we cross swords in the end.
We all must unite against the Communists.
would violence against the state be justified in the US at the moment or at what point would it be justified ?
We are far past the point of no return, far beyond a state of "1984". A case for revolution could have been made long before I was born.
i dont think i agree with you. Isnt one of the prime principals of libertarians the nap ? In effect you advocate for violence.
And you believe that that state has not aggressed upon us? Do you honestly believe the relationship we have with our goverment is that of voluntary exchange? Do you believe that by virtue of 51% of the population voting for our enslavement means that we've agreed to this?
I for one whole-heartedly disagree. I did NOT pledge allegiance to the welfare states of america.
>And you believe that that state has not aggressed upon us?
I agree with you on the facts just not the use of violience at the present.
>Do you honestly believe the relationship we have with our goverment is that of voluntary exchange?
Not at all. I live in the EU and its a true nightmare without my consent.
>Do you believe that by virtue of 51% of the population voting for our enslavement means that we've agreed to this?
Nope, but violence isnt the way to go, at the moment. I dont say that one never can use violence but right now, no. There is still the political option.
There is a popular ultimatum that is proposed towards right-wing libertarians, mainly the ones that favor Friedman or Austrian market economics;
Either society ascends to a monarchy, or it withers and compiles a solution by a forced state of anarchistic violence.
It's facetious, I know.
But please enlighten me if possible;
Do Right-Wing Libertarians, or Rothbardian/Hoppean Anarcho-Capitalists, see the reality of an eventual monarchy, to be a fitting redemption to the cycle of dismay since common democracy cut a tear in society?
So you agree that we would be the defenders, not the aggressors right?
Anyway good luck legislating your liberty back. While I would support any libertarian-ish public policy or political movement I highly doubt we'll get far against the masses of socialist voters.
Hiel, step-brothers.
>jkjk
>So you agree that we would be the defenders, not the aggressors right?
yeah
>Anyway good luck legislating your liberty back.
I dont know if it is possible but violence? Aimed against who? Trump since he is at the head of the state?
erp!
>only other one I feel comfortable using, US geo
>that post
>that image
beyond retarded
I have never been a monarchist, and I've never been a democrat. Neither is my preference. but perhaps it may be easier to secceed from a democratic state being that the state has the task of justifiying violence against some people who have done no harm other than leaving the union.
It may be harder for the democratic state to convince normalfags to START a civil war on their own soil.
nice argument
your posts and mishima's thoughts litteraly contradict eachother
Against anyone who comes to take our land from us and enslave us or tax us. If no one comes then there would be no violence. I hope for this outcome, but I doubt it.
>libertarian
>right
worst meme
socialism is literally destroying my fucking country.
Keep up the good fight boys
Hello again, mussolini posting guy again, right?
so? I don't agree with everything he wrote. He had some very strange ideas. He always thought and wrote about death but when he had his chance to serve in ww2 he lied. One could make the case that he was coward for most of his live.
He as a point but I feel people shouldnt be made to uphold it AND be held to it, I am an individual.
>anyone who comes to take our land from us and enslave us or tax us
So bombing the IRS would not be an act of aggression but an act of self defense ? In principal i agree with you but in practice i dont. There has to be a better way. Violence is not a good way to generate PR.
The libertarian used to be all about freedom, now it's all about killing commies.
You have forgotten the NAP, this it's shameful.
PR? We're already being called fascists and villans of society by the news and social media brainwashing. I choose to speak the truth because I will be always labeled as evil. Only the message of TOTAL REVOLUTION can virtue signal to those brave enough to side with us. theres no use in spreading the message of "look how nice and complaint with the system we are"
It's a shame you're so blind to the aggression of todays world against us.
That's false. Commie killing has largely been propagated by fascists and authoritarian rights who misconstrue Hoppe's work to attempt to justify killing commies. What Hoppe proposes with physical removal is not throwing communists out of helicopters but simply evicting them from your private property or covenant community.
I thought that the NAP was derived from work in the radical sector related to Hoppe, Rand and Rothbard?
When did people begin to conflate anarcho-capitalist preferences with a little bit of Austrian charm and guns to protect the nuclear family?
>see masked men trying enter your house
>call private security because you cannot outshoot them
>explain situation
>"sir what is your client number"
"w-what, help me im going to die. My McSecurity subscription ran out last month, i spent everything on redecorating my loli rape dungeon"
>"sir we can work someyhing out. It will set yiu back 300 thousand dollars"
"yea sure whatever"
*5 minutes later*
>"sir it seems your neighbor is asleep and nobdy is operating his toll road. Im afraid we can not come to your aid"
beep beep beep beep
his books were released post-war
I justify killing commies because they are a vicious threat to our property and freedom. They are no better than the state.
I give no credit to Hoppe or Rothbard for the reasons I have come to this conclusion. Although I do very much like them.
>his books were released post-war
I know that. The argument i was trying to make was just that for someone who always fantasied about blowing up like a rocket in the sky, lying when examined during ww2 is quite hypocritical. In his writing he "denied" the will to life but his body thought otherwise. He redeemed himself in the end though but it took him long enough.
>I choose to speak the truth
but do you act on it ?
Don't ask me that over the internet.
Redpill me on libertarianism
the answer is no or other wise you would be in prison for terrorism. You havent bombed the IRS, which, based on your comments would be justifed. You sound like a commie
>TOTAL REVOLUTION
>violence
>Anatomy of the State (Murray Rothbard)
mises.org
bump
Obviously I haven't bombed the IRS, you brought that up. I never said anything of the sort. I am talking about defense of my body and my family.
you are right, i brought it up but since you advocate for violence because you are taxed bombing the IRS would be only logical,no ?
what plan of action would you propose to further the libertarian agenda beside violence?
I still stand by my previous statements. you're mistaken in assuming I'm talking about going out of my way to assassinate the president or blow up the IRS. Secession from the union is the only way.
Do you think the founding fathers after declaring their independance went on ships to go fight the king? No, they stood their ground and fought untill they were left alone.
Easy version for illiterate babbies
this too
So here's a question: If libertarianism is so good, then how come there has never been a truly libertarian contry?
>what is somalia
If Betamax is so good how come VHS won?
PS How would a post-statist society prevent the rebirth of the state?
War, revolution. its a cycle of self-determination.
Are you seriously comparing media formats and government types?
So apparently there's a video of your hero beating his meat.
How do you feel about that?
pls post.
Troughout human history there has practically never been a period of statelesnes, implying that a libertarian order could not maintain itself spontaneously.
Most people are evil and/or do not like freedom.
Physically remove and/or kill any statist racketeers.
Doesn't that mean that libertarianism is incompatable with human nature? How do you make a distinction between organised enough private property and a state eg. megacorps?
If people truly choose a state then that would be an example of what we consider a non-statist society.
self-determination is the true goal of libertarianism, not an abstract sense of freedom.
kek
Man's nature it to recognize property. every man knows theft when he sees it and it isn't murkied by the states propaganda.
Libertarianism is the description of mans natural tastebuds of morality.
Voluntaryism > anarcho-capitalism
Aren't most countries nowadays non-statist then, after all you are free to leave.
>Voluntaryism = anarcho-capitalism
ftfy
Shared aka public property is also an inherent quality of man, most likely even more so than private.
They're compatible, but not the same
You mean like Iceland? Iceland from 900AD-1260AD had no state, no king, and no lords. It was literally a purely free market system with private courts, private police, and private chiefs (ie. landowners that people rented land from) who acted as leaders.
Or the Xeer legal system of the horn of Africa, which have private courts, insurance providers, and private security firms despite being iron-age primitives?
Or you know, the 98% of human history that encompasses the neolithic and paleolithic periods?
Are you free to live on property you own and maintain unmolested by the state or having to be uprooted from land that is rightfully your property? Can you Opt out of your contract without being violated? The answer is no. They will come and take from you regardless.
sure convenants are a thing, people voluntarily choose to make a contract to share property. this however only stems from private property as that private agent must choose to use his property for such a cause.
Also 98% of human behaviour. Most things we do are voluntary.
>Doesn't that mean that libertarianism is incompatible with human nature?
Yes, libertarianism is incompatible with a majority of humans, but this does not discomfort me as much as it used to. Most humans are not that smart, hence they require/desire a nanny state to help them out. I would have no problem with those people, except that they believe *everyone* should be subject to their states, voluntarily or not.
>How do you make a distinction between organized enough private property and a state eg. megacorps?
A state is coercive, and must remain coercive to survive. A voluntary society where citizens respect the property rights of others is not coercive, since any violent action is in defense of those same property rights and not for coercion.
It's not as easy as you may think. Renunciation of citizenship comes with a fee, a tax, extensive procedures/interviews/paperwork, and so on, so it's a very long and expensive process. If you choose to leave without doing that, they can come after you for tax evasion and such (since you're still counted as a citizen and are required to pay taxes). The only places they can't touch you are countries with no extradition treaties, which are typically not the best places to escape to if you're trying to leave.
bump
Just because someting works in a non-developed and sparsely populated society does not mean that it can work in our contemporary society. This could even be interpreted as evidence against libertarianism, as these systems were later inevitably replaced by more centralised ones.
In this context the state can be regarded as the property owner, or you can be regarded as the owner but under a government contract.
how did the government gain ownership of the property
Is it not a sign of a poor system if you have to assume that everybody under it is smart. How do you prevent regression towards the mean, and who will do all the low iq jobs? What is the difference between a megacorp that has a monopoly in a plot of land and a state? To my understanding that last bit only applies to the us.
How did anybody gain ownership of any property? Most likely through common agreement or the right of might.
the state has no legitimate claim to my body and my home. It maintains its territorial monopoly by violence and theft of the true property owners.
You dont understand what private property is if you believe the "right of might" is what determines its validity
initially it's first come first serve. whoever found it first can be the rightful owner. do you think the government found and used literally all the land first? no, the government gained ownership of the land through conquest and force, which makes it illegitimate.
NAP doesn't apply to commies, they reject the concept of individual sovereignty and must be removed lest they get the opportunity to act on that
>Is it not a sign of a poor system if you have to assume that everybody under it is smart. How do you prevent regression towards the mean, and who will do all the low iq jobs?
You make a fair point. Perhaps I am being a little over-dramatic in asserting that low IQ people wouldn't function in an anarchist society. That said, I wouldn't discount the idea of simply importing the products/services of low IQ jobs, or just automating those. Regression towards the mean is a tougher problem, because while I've seen evidence that IQ is genetic, it's not a completely reliable pattern.
>What is the difference between a megacorp that has a monopoly in a plot of land and a state?
A state is coercive. A megacorp can only maintain its monopoly by satisfying all its renters to such an extent that no other firm could hope to compete. Such a level of customer-satisfaction is incredibly costly to maintain, of course, so that corporation would either have to lower its standards or raise its prices, either of which would invite competition and undo the monopoly.
it does apply to commies, they just violate it by advocating the abolishion of private property.
Reminder.
You choose to live within the states legistilative propery.
>the states legistilative propery.
meaningless legal jargon. They rightfully own nothing.
If we take that stance then most property is illegitimate.
>Reminder.
No one cares.
Eagerly waiting for the PFS's YouTube to drop the new videos.
How is the state more coercive than a megacorporation? Eg. you live within the corp so you follow its rules vs. you live within the state so you follow its rules. Also you'll find automation to be far more difficult than that.
How do you determine the rightful owner?
Great read. Saved.
Originally, homesteading. Using your labor to transform and settle the natural land. The state has not done this. They "own" land by murdering those who say they don't.
>Or you know, the 98% of human history that encompasses the neolithic and paleolithic periods?
reminder that is where ancaps and lolbertarians want to send us back to
>Pinochet
>Libertarian
I guess authoritarianism is cool if you worship capitalism right?